What's the True Unemployment Rate?

[heball]

I find the numbers appalling and directly reflective of our inept government and the direction our democratically elected, Republican and Democratic leaders are taking the American people. Obama shows up today in my home state to do what? To preside over a photo op and spread the propaganda of how great the stimulus package is for the state of Ohio. At the same time, biting the hand that feeds the public, by threatening tax increases on those with small businesses and on up the food chain. In the meantime we have unemployment rates of 11.7% in my home industrial county, 18.3% in Huron Co, 17% in Ottawa Co, 16.4% in Pike Co, 16.3% in Morgan Co, 15.7% in Adams Co, and then a state average of only 8.8% which is seasonally adjusted and 9.7% unadjusted. Obviously not taking into consideration those who have "lost hope" looking for jobs in a dismal market. Transparency in government? With introduction of "Averages" of unemployment I don't see it. If someone is going to print unemployment figures, at least have the courage to tell the truth, averages are nothing more than sugar coating on today's disastrous political agenda.:mad:

[Gray]

Welcome to the board.

I think those whose benefits have expired are not counted?

[Reform2009]

The actual numbers are probably over 15%. A lot of people who are laid off are not collecting unemployment and frantically looking and depending on their spouse`s income to survive. Also, there are countless of people who are independent contractors like real estate agents/brokers, mortgage brokers, car salesman, and other sales people who are on commission who simply are getting by day by day with little or no income and hoping the economy will turn around.

[heball]

So true, some of the most populated counties have the lowest unemployment rates in Ohio. Cuyahoga Co (Cleveland) 7.6% Franklin Co (Columbus) 7.2% and Hamilton Co (Cincinnati) is 7.7%.

[sonnytt]

If we count the long-term unemployed and the part-time employed, as we must, it's probably in the 13-15% area.

[pinqy]

Argh, this frustrate me to no end.

The Unemployment rate comes from a monthly household survey of 60,000 households. If you worked for at least one hour of pay (or 15 hours unpaid work in a family business) you are Employed. If you did not work, actively looked for work in the last 4 weeks, and are currently available to work (people on temporary layoffs expecting to return to their job don't have to have looked) you are Unemployed. The Unemployment rate is Unemployed/(Employed + Unemployed)

So I'm not sure what the OP is talking about "averages." The UE rate isn't an average, it's the percentage of the Labor Force looking and failing to find work (regardless of Unemployment Insurance)

[pinqy]

If we count the long-term unemployed We do count the long-term unemployed...as long as they are still looking for work. If they're not looking, they're not participating in the labor market.

and the part-time employed, as we must, it's probably in the 13-15% area.Why would you want to count a part-time worker as Unemployed? They have a job, therefore they're Employed. By definition of "Employed." Now, looking at part-time workers who want full-time work and reason they don't have full-time work is useful to look at, but shouldn't be part of Unemployed.

[ChrisSpencer]

I find the numbers appalling and directly reflective of our inept government and the direction our democratically elected, Republican and Democratic leaders are taking the American people. Obama shows up today in my home state to do what? To preside over a photo op and spread the propaganda of how great the stimulus package is for the state of Ohio. At the same time, biting the hand that feeds the public, by threatening tax increases on those with small businesses and on up the food chain. In the meantime we have unemployment rates of 11.7% in my home industrial county, 18.3% in Huron Co, 17% in Ottawa Co, 16.4% in Pike Co, 16.3% in Morgan Co, 15.7% in Adams Co, and then a state average of only 8.8% which is seasonally adjusted and 9.7% unadjusted. Obviously not taking into consideration those who have "lost hope" looking for jobs in a dismal market. Transparency in government? With introduction of "Averages" of unemployment I don't see it. If someone is going to print unemployment figures, at least have the courage to tell the truth, averages are nothing more than sugar coating on today's disastrous political agenda.:mad:

How would you change the unemployment data presentation?

Averages are a good way to group together different geographic areas, like States, when you have 50 of them it's kind of difficult to name each and every county on its own.

Remember that the unemployment rate only takes into consideration those who are within the labour force. This excludes part-time workers, under-employed workers, those who are incarcerated or institutionalised, under the age of 16 or over the age of (generally) 65, and those who are not actively seeking employment.

However in the interest of consistency there's no problem with the current employment calculation because it still allows you to measure RELATIVE performance of the labour market. That's what is the most important feature of the data.

[ChrisSpencer]

If we count the long-term unemployed and the part-time employed, as we must, it's probably in the 13-15% area.

Why must we measure long-term unemployed and part-time employed? The current system has remain consistent for a long time, so whether or not it takes into consideration the groups you mention the current calculations still measure relative performance of the market and accurately portrays the employment situation IMO.

[LJB1031]

I think the underemployed should be factored in.

[pinqy]

Remember that the unemployment rate only takes into consideration those who are within the labour force.True, but the numbers for not in the labor force and subdivisions thereof are published.

This excludes part-time workers, under-employed workers,No it doesn't, they are Employed.

those who are incarcerated or institutionalised,they and the military are not in the population.

under the age of 16 or over the age of (generally) 65,There is no upper limit.

and those who are not actively seeking employment. Except for those on layoff who expect to return to their job.

I'm still not understanding what the OP was babbling about when talking about "averages." There are no averages used in the Employment situation.

[globemaster1234]

All of the counties in oregon already have double digit unemployment rates. Some counties are into 20% unemployment rates. teenagers are up 22% unemployment. We've had liberal democrats for decades and they have literally killed this state. I live in a county with 12.1% unemployment. Its' not just unemployment its' also companies cutting payrates. I have to find a second job now and there are no jobs here. We have state ran healthcare which is paid for by taxing the hell out of the residents and they still cut all government services back because they have bankrupted our state economy. That is living in a socialist economy. In the end it fails.

[PeterGriffin]

The U-6 report is a more comprehensive employment barometer than the "official" U-3 report. Currently at 14.8%

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

[Reform2009]

The U-6 report is a more comprehensive employment barometer than the "official" U-3 report. Currently at 14.8%

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

They are wrong. It is more like 25.65%. I placed an ad for office work and I had over 300 plus inquiries, most of them being college graduates and willing to take a 50% plus pay cut and work without benefits. A good percentage of them had graduate degrees and the majority of them were NOT on unemployment and have been looking for months.

[pinqy]

The U-6 report is a more comprehensive employment barometer than the "official" U-3 report. Currently at 14.8%

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm
But it's also way more subjective and not as useful for looking at what the actual labor market is doing. The U3 covers people participating in the labor market...those with jobs and those trying to get jobs. The U6 covers the same plus those not looking for work but who have looked sometime in the previous year and who claim they want a job and are available and all those who are working part-time due to business conditions or can't find a full-time job.

[jrmarlin2000]

I find the numbers appalling and directly reflective of our inept government and the direction our democratically elected, Republican and Democratic leaders are taking the American people. Obama shows up today in my home state to do what? To preside over a photo op and spread the propaganda of how great the stimulus package is for the state of Ohio. At the same time, biting the hand that feeds the public, by threatening tax increases on those with small businesses and on up the food chain. In the meantime we have unemployment rates of 11.7% in my home industrial county, 18.3% in Huron Co, 17% in Ottawa Co, 16.4% in Pike Co, 16.3% in Morgan Co, 15.7% in Adams Co, and then a state average of only 8.8% which is seasonally adjusted and 9.7% unadjusted. Obviously not taking into consideration those who have "lost hope" looking for jobs in a dismal market. Transparency in government? With introduction of "Averages" of unemployment I don't see it. If someone is going to print unemployment figures, at least have the courage to tell the truth, averages are nothing more than sugar coating on today's disastrous political agenda.:mad:

Shocking, isn't it? All the "censored" numbers flying around! That's so un-democratic isn't it? :eek:

[Drive Business]

I think the underemployed should be factored in.

U6 deals with underemployed workers.
It would be impossible to derive true underemployed stats. Most americans think they are underemployed and should be earning a better salary.

I still think U3 is the best measure.

[JeffR]

If we calculated the way we used to, it would be around 15%.

[pinqy]

If we calculated the way we used to, it would be around 15%.
We do calculate the way we used to. The U6 is 14.8%, but that includes "part time for economic reasons" which has NEVER been included in the official figures, and the "Marginally attached" which was never even counted until 1994. Discouraged workers were included until 1967, and the rate including them is currently 8.5% (the definition did change a little and now they must have looked in the last 12 months). The only other real change was in people waiting to start a new job. Until 1994 they were automatically counted as unemployed, now they must have looked for work in the past 4 weeks to be unemployed. Oh, and the min age for the labor force was raised from 14 to 16 in 1967.

Sources: Employment and Earnings Jan 2009 (http://www.bls.gov/opub/ee/empearn200901.pdf) (page 276 starts the historic comparability)

To see for yourself, issues of Employment and Earnings from 1960-1980 can be found HERE (http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/publications/employment)

The U6 in no way is representative of "how we used to calculate." The closest would be the U4.

[Drive Business]

As an economic tool, the current calculations provide enough insight. I think the trend data is the most important part.

There appears to be two issues that the OP and other posters have with the numbers.
1) The US is so large the stats have little regional value. There's nothing you can do to change this. The US unemployment numbers are aggregate indicators for US macroeconomic purposes. Some regions may mirror the US numbers better than others.
2) A different calculation could provide political fuel. This has been ongoing. The dems argue the numbers are skewed when the repubs are in power, the repubs argue the numbers are distorted when the dems are in power.... so on, and so on....

[pinqy]

1) The US is so large the stats have little regional value. There's nothing you can do to change this. The US unemployment numbers are aggregate indicators for US macroeconomic purposes. Some regions may mirror the US numbers better than others.
State, County, Metropolitan and other local numbers are published, though. Tomorrow is the release, in fact. These numbers are calculated a little bit differently, of course, because the sheer cost of the surveys would be ridiculous if they tried to do it the same way as the National figures. For local area figures, Unemployment Insurance is used as part of the model, unlike the National numbers.

[daveNYC]

U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

This is what the BLS uses as definitions of the various levels of unemployment. The number that is usually reported is, like they say, U3. U6, from what I understand, is pretty close to the definition of unemployment that is used in Europe, though I could be mistaken.

[wiley8425]

Welcome to the board.

I think those whose benefits have expired are not counted?

Correct. And at least in my state the employment office is always trying to get people off the roles on technicalities. (So they can keep the money.)

[Drive Business]

This is what the BLS uses as definitions of the various levels of unemployment. The number that is usually reported is, like they say, U3. U6, from what I understand, is pretty close to the definition of unemployment that is used in Europe, though I could be mistaken.

I think Europe's unemployment is close to our U3.

[pinqy]

I think Europe's unemployment is close to our U3.
Correct. Europe has age cut-offs of 15-74, but otherwise it's about the same. Some of the individual countries have their own measures as well, but everyone is switching to the ILO standard which is our U3. Nobody has ever used anything close to the U6 as an official measure.

[citizen1]

Omnibus Bill – Job Give-Away to illegal aliens.

Our Senate did not pass the E-Verify Amendment #604 in the pork filled Omnibus Bill! They voted to give away our JOBS to illegal aliens over citizens 50 – 47.
:evil:
I would love to see some talk show commentator stick a microphone in the face of anyone of these “ANTI-American worker” Representatives and demand an explanation to this insult in our economic time of need?!
:naughty:
Please start with asking our California Representatives HOW voting against E-Verify will help our 10% state unemployment rate of legitimate workers?!